Hi, I dont know if make sense overbet on river. What is villain's calling range on turn? In my opinion his range is preety merged (or he calls monsters?).

Poker Stars, $0.10/$0.25 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 6 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

SB: $32.65 (130.6 bb)
Hero (BB): $54.84 (219.4 bb)
UTG: $26.79 (107.2 bb)
MP: $25 (100 bb)
CO: $25 (100 bb)
BTN: $27.94 (111.8 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 9J or 97 (both hands don't have showdown value so they are good hands for donk and overbet..)
UTG folds, MP raises to $0.60, 3 folds, Hero calls $0.35

Flop: ($1.30) 8 T 2 (2 players)
Hero bets $0.40, MP calls

Turn: ($2.10) 3 (2 players)
Hero bets $4.20, MP calls

River: ($10.30) 3 or 4 (2 players) (in my opinion both cards are blank)
Hero ??

First you have to determine what hands you are going to bomb-bomb for value and if your range truly has an advantage here in terms of nut combos.

Note if the river is a 3 it will matter for a hand like T8s because it was just counterfeited by any over pair so it doesn't make much sense to bomb there you would essentially turn your hand into a bluff vs his capped calling range at an over pair or maybe AT.

The large betsizing also narrows ranges which amplifies blocking effects. Since fullhouses are in both players ranges, being able to block sets is a big deal. If the run out is 33 then blocking A3hh or A3ss and if it is a 4 then blocking A5hh,A5ss,56hh,56ss might be a big deal. Those hands are all more likely to be in your range and only 4 -6 combos of hands, just using them as examples for nut hands that might benefit your bluffs from different blocking effects depending on the runout.

Jc9c has a little bit of a negative blocker effect with the J because that blocks JJ which is one of the weaker hands villain might play this way so one of the first that villain might decide to fold to a river overbet. 7c9c is pretty great because it doesn't block hearts which villain might play this way, there are a ton of hands we would prefer to see fold, and we still have some straight equity as backup.

Now the question is overall does your sizing fit your range vs villain's? It really depends on how villain will be playing sets here and to some extent how you play TT preflop.

I don't really like your line, as I don't see what you're repping, and I think villain would rarely raise the turn when you bet so big (does he always raise TT/88?), so he can definitely have some monsters. You don't need to bet huge on the river to make him fold missed flush draws, and he should probably call with Tx, because you have so few value hands. A PSB should be sufficient to get the job done.

Spookily, I had 97s in the BB on almost the exact same board texture last night, and went for 2x pot on the river, but the action sequence was different. (Villain bet flop, then checked back the turn with a more obviously capped range than in your HH). #9HighLikeABoss.

I think when leading flop 1/3 or less there is absolutely nothing your villain will fold. so if leading I think it must be bigger. But I think you must check a lot when OOP in this situation. I think it's well known that drawy board and deep stack favour the player in position so you don't want to inflate the pot.

Plus your range is at a disadvantage.

About the 2* overbet turn, I think it's very uncommon to overbet 2* on turn. I think the good players never overbet turn that big but I can't explain well.

I think the issue is there is no value in it. Your opponent has to defend 33% to make your bluffs unprofitable and it's easy for him to do. And if your opponent has some kind of draw or weaker bluff catcher he still has room to fold so you did not get max EV with your good hands, while your bluffs are unprofitable. And I guess if you were to compare EV 2*overbet turn is rarely or never optimal.

Another thing is after the turn as played, opponent range is very strong and I'm not very confident about another barrel.

Plus it's true you don't rep much. Or let's say you bet 2*pot on river, villain has to win 40% of the time to make a profitable call. So how do you construct your range with 60% value and 40% bluff ?

But don't forget that on the turn he also called a 2* pot so he already expect to win 40% passing this bet even tough a bet may come on the river. So after the turn, you have to give up some % of the time.

Yes, I have range advatage because if I donk bet small and villain just calls his range is preety capped(villain never calls sets, two pairs, AA..). Probably I don't understand this. Explain please. I have all sets in my range.
I absolutely don't understand how you can play only nl2-5

kingkong:

In my opinion is small bet well. If villain just calls his range is preety caped(so I get a range advantage). If he raises flop I have good odds to call with draws like this.

I don't know why villain can never call sets and you might raise TT some of the time depending on villain so it's not like the board is a total whiff for either of you.

I think your bb defense range hits this board alright but it's a lot of medium equity draws and middle strength hands like T9 or 78, so I don't think your range has a huge advantage where you want to bet everything, especially for 2x pot and then 2x pot again.

See above. I just don't think your range pulls that far ahead on this flop.


I agree the flop bet is fine. People are more likely to make a mistake vs a smaller sizing than a bigger sizing.

Hey man... Nice crazy exploitative line lol! Its a bit all over the place but I do think it is most probably a nice line, however, you do have to finish it off.

The villain is extremely unlikely to have any kind of nuts hand as he didn't raise your little donk on the flop. When you then bet the turn so big you're representing either the nuts or a draw. Against that perceived range, the villain might call with some kind of strong TP type hand or a draw. Which is why you have to finish it off on the river! The question is, do you make it big enough to fold the AT or do you bet small to fold out the missed draws (or we could check-raise which I do like a little lol) I am being pulled towards the small sizing. I get the feeling this guy wont fold his TP, and he could still have AA. I'm torn between all the options. As played, I think you might as well just ob jam and fast! Make it look like you didn't care that the river card missed. If I had taken this line up until now then I think that is the play I would make on the river but that's only because the only time I can see myself taking this line is if I'm against a player who loves to call his draws and plays straight forward Level Two Poker. Against different opponents I would make different river plays here.

I also have to say that this line is rather easy to read. I'd bet that you wont be doing this when you are strong AND when you are weak. If I was playing against you I would call your river bet with allsorts just so that I could see what hands you were taking this line with. The second I see you only had a draw, I will not be folding to your donks again. And I will abuse your overbets too. If you mix up your plays you will sting me, but as kingkong said, you will find it very difficult to balance a line like this.

I personally wouldn't have done any of this unless it was a very special occasion. On the flop I would have gone for the standard check-raise or the standard check-call. Our hand is pretty well disguised so we can usually get away with a raise when we hit our nuts, so I would usually just go for that cheap option. If I were you I wouldn't get so creative. It is dangerous. What's that saying - "Keep it simple, stupid".

(don't listen to JustGrinding, that dude sucks. Arty gave ok advice, it is important to be aware of the cards you are representing. Kingkong gave GTO advice which is not really needed for you).

You don't have a range advantage on the flop, even if you have TT in your pre-flop flatting range, because villain has AA-JJ and all the best Tx and best draws, whereas you have a lot of weaker pairs and non-nut draws. With TT, check-raising is almost certainly more profitable than leading. If you want to check with the nuts, you should mostly check with your draws too.

FWIW, if you donkbet 1.6bb, Snowie is only folding 13%, and hardly raises anything. MP can/should definitely just call with TT/88 some or even most of the time, and AA should probably always just flat, unless MP goes for a small raise at a high frequency with its range.
It's really risky to bet huge when you're OOP, so you generally want to be much more polarized (monsters and combo draws usually). I'd much rather only get into an overbetting mindset if/when villain has checked back one of the streets (or checked twice when I'm in position). Him calling a small flop bet doesn't necessarily mean he's capped at one pair.
If you checked the flop, and then he checked back, then he clearly would be capped, as he would bet his sets always, and overpairs, top pair, and draws at very high frequencies. If he checks back the flop, only then does overbetting the turn seem like a valid option. Indeed, if the flop checks through, Snowie says 2x pot is the optimal turn leading size, since that blank 3 almost never helps MP's weak check back range improve.

I like the idea of a flop donk from time to time as an alternate line, unpredictable etc. But the size is too small, and you only block JJ and 99 which would call 1/3 pot anyway. So, if to randomly donk a flop, I would prefer to be holding at least one heart and would prefer J9 versus 79 for the J blocker. As for turn, the second “donk barrel” is very speculative, and oversizing makes vil decisions easier not harder.

MP should raise the donk here with his TT/88 in a $25 game. Only a complete fool would do anything different. And that is why I said the villain ALMOST certainly doesn't hold TT or 88.

Seems weird for the "exploitive expert" to recommend the best exploitive line for the bottom of his range for the top of his range where it seems like it would be the worst option.

Amazing insight as always! I bow down!

and this is why you're getting destroyed by players like OP

No I'm not lol. What are you on about?? I'd destroy any $25 player.

I've made hundreds of thousands playing cash games. What have you made Zkesic, you going to show your graph???

do you have graphs?

Yeah man, my exploitative style is somewhat unpopular among the GTO heavy population here and so I have posted my graph on here a good few times. I really cant be arsed to put it up again. But all the regular posters here are aware that I was taking 8bbs off the $200 games (around $80 per hour or so) before randomly turning Buddhist, stopping playing, and starting work on a training guide for beginners instead.

Let me guess, the sample was like 20k hands.

Also, one doesn't just stop playing if they're making $80/hour.

I'm sure that you just realized you aren't making any money anymore playing poker, so you started "working on a training guide for beginners", like 90% of other coaches did.

If you were actually smart, understood poker and the exploitative strategy, you wouldn't be sharing your strategy with other players. If everyone understands how your exploitative strategy works, it won't be profitable anymore. It's pretty sad that you don't get that.

It isn't that you're the only one on this site who's using exploitative strategy. I'm sure most people here are using it (including me). You are just the only one stupid enough to share it.

I fully intend to make more money from my book. And I have an series of playbooks planned.

My total sample was into the millions of hands... Your math isn't very good is it Zkesic.

... You didn't post your graph. And the reason is obvious. You're the one who sucks at Poker. Like Grinding and many others here. Arty is a micro stakes player but I think he wins a little. Do correct me if I'm wrong.

Can you link to here you posted your graph? Couldn't find it in your posting history

I wasn't actually aware of that. I kind of got the gist that you used to beat 100NL+, but I haven't searched for evidence.
I say this with more respect than I usually use for replies to you, but if you haven't played online for a few years, I think you'd be stunned at how much the games have changed. I like playing (and beating) micros because it's low stress, but I would not claim to have an edge in games I haven't played recently. Maybe your style would still crush contemporary 50NL or even 100NL on Stars, but there really aren't many people with big winrates any more, and it's hard to take your criticisms of posters here seriously if you're not even playing any more. If your book ever gets published, everyone's gonna ask to see a recent graph, not one from when games were incredibly soft.

Haha good ol measuring contest again, eh? Weird thing about guys who make a lot of money they don't usually have to go around bragging how much money they make. Ymmv.

Edit: also +1 to Arty's comments about games today vs when you were supposedly crushing it.

I would really pay for the book of Yadoula. I think I m a fan

Lol cheers KingKong, I think

It was 4 years ago now! This book has taken ages. But no, I keep an eye on the games and I would still destroy $100 for around 10bb's without any practice. If I wanted to play the $200 games again I would brush up on some GTO first, but with a little practice I think I can get all the way to the 10K games. This is my new target. I'm getting back to the games now, to encourage book sales, and as I am only going for glory I'll play on stars. All I need is a stack, it's hard to get a deal without many recent hands, so I'm hoping book sales will pay for one.

Will put up that link but am in a real rush right this second. Sound peeps.

Yes but you need to be careful not go on tilt and lose everything at once because my intuition is you very intense with that.

Please start a PG&C thread with this claim in the first post. As far as I know, no one even managed 10bb/100 at 50NLz for 100k hands on Stars last year.

+1